Subject line says it. More info. There are 2 repeaters in my frequent travel zone, one on the north end and one on the south end. One is toned the other is open. I'm limited on mem spaces, so can I use the tone mem to open the none toned repeater? Will try it next time I'm in the area, but thought I'd ask the experts in the mean time. Tks

Yes. Adding a tone will not affect the repeater that doesn't need one to open. You can use the one channel location for both, but just remember--unlikely as it may be--that both will open and retransmit your signal if you're within the reception range of both.

Tks for the reply. I was about 90% sure that was the way it would work. And no problem on hitting them both at same time. They are over 150 miles apart. And I seldom use full power for repeaters when mobile.

Tks for the reply. I was about 90% sure that was the way it would work. And no problem on hitting them both at same time. They are over 150 miles apart. And I seldom use full power for repeaters when mobile.

Don't "assume" there won't be a problem. I own a 2M repeater that of course requires a PL tone to open. There is a co-channel repeater about 200 miles away that I don't usually hear except for during band openings. It doesn't require a PL tone to open. Some individual within the service area of that other repeater that uses that repeater is transmitting a PL tone that opens MY repeater. His signal though is weak enough so that I can't hear much of his audio so I haven't been able to determine who it is yet. What I hear is white noise, kerchunk, white noise, kerchunk, etc. This has been going on for more than a year now. It's pretty annoying to say the least. I found out a few months ago what is actually causing it, and that's what it is. I'd like to ring his little neck..

So, in short, DO NOT use a PL tone if the repeater you are using doesn't require one. VHF & UHF band openings can propagate signals 300 miles or more. You will likely be interfering with other repeaters if you do as you plan...

Some repeaters employ "anti-PL" circuits (easy to do) which use a receiver CTCSS decoder to inhibit operation, rather than allow it, intentionally -- specifically to keep users having the selected CTCSS tone from activating the repeater (purposely).

Some repeaters employ "anti-PL" circuits (easy to do) which use a receiver CTCSS decoder to inhibit operation, rather than allow it, intentionally -- specifically to keep users having the selected CTCSS tone from activating the repeater (purposely).

But it would be easy enough to just try it.

So, what are you suggesting? That I contact the other repeater owner and ask him to put "anti-PL" on his repeater just because an inconsiderate user on his system is interfering with mine? Yeah, that'll go over really well.

Using a PL tone to access a repeater that doesn't require tone is not good amateur practice, and it's inconsiderate besides...

Don't "assume" there won't be a problem. I own a 2M repeater that of course requires a PL tone to open. There is a co-channel repeater about 200 miles away that I don't usually hear except for during band openings. It doesn't require a PL tone to open. Some individual within the service area of that other repeater that uses that repeater is transmitting a PL tone that opens MY repeater. His signal though is weak enough so that I can't hear much of his audio so I haven't been able to determine who it is yet. What I hear is white noise, kerchunk, white noise, kerchunk, etc. This has been going on for more than a year now. It's pretty annoying to say the least. I found out a few months ago what is actually causing it, and that's what it is. I'd like to ring his little neck.....

Please don't take this reply the wrong way, but... So you're going to be critical because someone--who may not even know he is causing 'interference'--is annoying you? Pardon me for saying it this way, but you shouldn't even have a repeater up for use if you're going to be that critical of such interference. I could understand you complaint if the person was doing it purposefully, but from what you're saying he full well not be.

The underlying cause is not your problem, but the solving of it partially is. If yours is a coordinated repeater, what you should do is to contact the owner of the other repeater, with a copy of your letter to the coordinating authority of your area, and inform him/them of the problem. That's what the co-ordinating people are there for--to solve problems like that. The owner of the other repeater, if he's got any sense of responsibility at all, would co-operate with you in solving the interference, and if he won't, he could well be forced to take his machine off the air.

No, You don't 'have it right.' I'm just trying to say that you seem to have no patience--something a repeater owner really needs sometimes--for someone who may not even be aware that they're causing a problem with your machine, then suggested the accepted way to deal with the problem.

No, You don't 'have it right.' I'm just trying to say that you seem to have no patience--something a repeater owner really needs sometimes--for someone who may not even be aware that they're causing a problem with your machine, then suggested the accepted way to deal with the problem.

After all, I did ask you not to take my post the wrong way....

So, now you're the resident psychologist too? I've been in the repeater game longer than you have even been licensed. I don't really think you need to be giving me lessons on how to be a repeater owner (unless of course you are willing to send me lots of money to pay for the venture)...

When you put up your own coordinated repeater, and spend some years dealing with all the annoyances that go along with it (including inconsiderate operators who "may" not even know what their own emissions are, and timing out your repeater repeatedly) than I might be inclined to listen to what you have to say. But so far you haven't brought anything to the table of any value.

Further, with respects to a particular operator "not knowing" they are transmitting a PL tone, Part 97 REQUIRES operators are responsible for their own emissions. So, get familiar with Part 97 before encouraging "poor amateur practices" to the masses. See 97.101(a)...

Look, I've tried to be polite about this, and I'm hardly encouraging 'poor practices' since I did specify to be careful--that the transmission may open both repeaters. Now the politeness is going out the window. BTW, since you don't know me at all, who are you to say what my experiences are, Mr. ASSumer.

So, let's just let it drop, since you seem to be one of those omnipotent ones who want to make an argument out of every subject where someone else's opinion differs from yours. You're on ignore.

And now to wrap up our Saturday repeater forum entertainment, I would like to say this:

When someone uses a PL tone on a repeater that does not need one for access, the operator will never know what if any interference he may be causing elsewhere. It likely won't be harmful interference, but it certainly can be (think repeater time-out during which urgent or emergency traffic is going on). I know, because I have been witness to it many times.

I am not here complaining about my own situation, I know how to deal with it and will do so my own way and in my own time.

What I AM here for is to promote good amateur practices by all operators. Promoting the use of PL tone on a repeater that does not require it an indefensible position. It's just plain bad practice by the operator.

But if he uses the tone to access the toned repeater then he will also key the un-toned repeater if he is within range. Maybe the coordinators shouldn't put two repeaters on the same frequency pair when they are within range of each other.

By the way, we don't know that it is possible for him to hit both repeaters from anywhere along his route.

But if he uses the tone to access the toned repeater then he will also key the un-toned repeater if he is within range. Maybe the coordinators shouldn't put two repeaters on the same frequency pair when they are within range of each other.

By the way, we don't know that it is possible for him to hit both repeaters from anywhere along his route.

True on both counts however, the untoned repeater trustee always has the option of requiring tone access. That's the trustee's decision. If he wants to deal with stray signals by not using tone access, that's all on him. But using a tone when tone is not necessary is just undermining the whole purpose of PL tone in general.

The issue isn't whether the two repeaters are too close together, it's about when the band opens. In my case, the other repeater is more than far enough away for co-channel coordination(200+ miles). But when the band opens, there is enough stray signal to bring up the wrong machine without the operator on the other end aware he is accessing it. If he were not using PL tone(or a different PL tone), there would be no problem.

In the case of the original poster, he may not be in a place where he hits both at the same time, but he also doesn't know if he hits it when there is an opening.

Copyright 2000-2018 eHam.net, LLC
eHam.net is a community web site for amateur (ham) radio operators around the world.
Contact the site with comments or questions.
WEBMASTER@EHAM.NETSite Privacy Statement